Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010207962025 2025:GAU-AS:13763 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1148/2025 AMAR FARUK HUSSAIN S/O- ISMAIL HUSSAIN, R/O- VILL- KAWATIKA, PS BIJNI, DIST. CHIRANG, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:UTTAM RAY S/O RAMESH CH. RAY SI (P) OF NORTH BONGAIGAON PP P.S. AND DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A CHOUDHURY, MR A AHMED,MISS. P M AHMED,U U KHAN,MR. A AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 15.10.2025 Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.K. Parashar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/4 By this application filed under Section 528/442, BNSS, 2023 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 18.07.2025 passed by the Special Judge, Bongaigaon in Special (Nar) Case No. 127(BGN)/2023 arising out of Bongaigaon P.S Case No. 230/2023 registered under Section 21(b)/29 of NDPS Act, by which the zimma/custody of the vehicle of the petitioner was rejected by the said Court. The vehicle being Maruti XL6 Smart Hybrid Zeta with keys were seized in connection with Bongaigaon P.S Case No. 230/2023 by the police personnel as the said vehicle was found to be used in the commission of the offence and the seizure was made on 03.06.2023. Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel submits that since the said date i.e., 03.06.2023, the vehicle has been lying in the police station and he had moved an application for custody of the said vehicle before the learned Court of Special Judge, Bongaigaon but custody was rejected vide order dated 18.07.2025. In the said order, it was reflected that a report was called for and the same was received stating that a report of confiscation is yet to be received and in view of the same, zimma was rejected by the Trial Court. Mr. A. Ahmed submits that it has been held by the Apex Court that it is of no use to keep the seized vehicles at the police stations for long as the same would result in wear and tear of the said vehicle with time and as such has prayed for custody of the same during pendency of the trial of the instant case. Page No.# 3/4 By the last order dated 17.09.2025, a report was called for from the Office- in-Charge of Bongaigaon Police Station as to whether confiscation proceeding has been initiated to confiscate the said vehicle and in response to the same, Mr. K.K. Parashar inspite of best effort could not get the said report from the Bongaigaon Police Station. However, it may be stated that as per law, confiscation proceeding can be initiated only after the trial ends and as such, at this stage, there cannot be any issue with confiscation of the said vehicle. In Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai and Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283, the Apex Court had held that it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. It was held that the vehicle should be given in custody to the owner or Insurance Company or to the person from whom it is seized or to any third person and if none of the said authority claim the custody of the said vehicle, the same may be auctioned by the Court. It is also observed that before handing over such vehicles, appropriate photographs of the said vehicle should be taken and detailed panchnama should be prepared. In view of the same, it is as such directed that the vehicle in question i.e., Maruti XL6 Smart Hybrid Zeta with keys seized by the police in Bongaigaon P.S Page No.# 4/4 Case No. 230/2023 corresponding to Special (Nar) Case No. 127(BGN)/2023 may be given in custody to the owner of the said vehicle. It is also stated that the petitioner is the owner of the said vehicle and the same has been reflected in the FIR that the petitioner namely, Amar Faruk Hussain is the owner of the said vehicle and that it further directed that the police before handing over the said vehicle to the petitioner may look into the ownership of the said vehicle and after taking photograph and by following the required procedures as per the Apex Court directions, the custody of the vehicle may be allowed to the petitioner. Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant